Yeah, the art vs entertainment argument makes no sense. It's like saying Shakespeare isn't art because it was meant to ultimately entertain people via plays. Never mind that a lot of art historically, has been generally viewed as entertainment. Going to art museums for instance, is fun. Dissecting art is also fun and can be construed as entertainment when you're drinking your wine with your friends, which is what rich people did. The point about literature is important too. Guess Jane Austin's works aren't art because they're entertaining as fuck now, I take it?
I remember having to go see Macbeth as part of the Irish exam system where you had to see the stage play assigned for that years English exam (As it would come up during the exam). During the part where assassins kill Macduff's family, the stage players did the scene and it ended on a fade to black with one of the assassins stabbing Lady Macduff in the vagina. Of course, for a bunch of teenagers in a crowd it was a hoot but a few people weren't happy. Next few days, a letter went out to the Irish Times with someone angry at that scene and how it was portrayed. Also complaining how it disrespected Shakespeare and his "Art".
Two days later. A letter appeared from the Dublin Shakespere society and co-signed by the actors in the play that various Shakespere companies and society across the world portray that scene in such a vulgar manner as its hinted that Lady Macduff is pregnant and the assassins take Macbeth's order to the letter, which includes the unborn. But it varies by society at large, the audience and the countries society that produces the play if she gets stabbed in the stomach or stabbed in the vagina or dispatched some other way. And it turned out they intentionally played that scene with the vagina being stabbed because they knew they were getting schools in and it would both entertain and leave an impression on them to help them remember the play for their exams. They finished by saying the bard's plays were always about entertainment and had a lot of bawdy elements, double entendres and excessive violence since they were first put on at the globe and it would be more disrespectful to deny those elements existed than sanitizing them.
There's always going to be extreme viewpoints on what constitutes art and entertainment and willful ignorance on both sides on anything that doesn't suit their argument. Shakespeare always had a vulgar side that always seems to get ignored when his works are put in the context of "art"
tl;dr its about ethics in Shakespearean literature and performances.
tl;dr part 2. Why haven't we harnessed the consistent kinetic motion of Marshall McLuhan's corpse to power the eastern sea board of the US yet?
